View from the Pew

So I am going to resume blogging and this time I am going to attempt a blog a day.  I wonder how long that will last?

What brings me back?  Well, the amazing response to a little pilot survey which we have put out from CODEC alongside the College of Preachers, called 'View from the Pew'.  If you want a full copy of the report then click here and send a message to Theresa who will gladly pop one in the post for the princely sum of £5.  We are not putting the report online at present. This isn't because we're embarrassed about it.  It simply means we have to try and recover some of the cost of the research outlay by selling the report.  Of course, if someone wants to come along and underwrite the cost, then we'll happily put the whole report online and send out copies free. 

So View from the Pew was commissioned by the College of Preachers and funding was also found from a University of Durham Seedcorn Research Grant.  The idea was to do a micro-survey looking at the reception of preaching in a cross-section of churches both in the Durham area and across the country.  It is a micro-survey and we have made much of that - as well as the danger of using such a small survey to extrapolate national results.  In the press release, in the report, in our interviews, we have consistently pointed out that the results stand for those surveyed.  In other words, we haven't said that 96.6% of all churchgoers like sermons.  We said that 96.6% of our sample said that.  It is quite amazing that the press forget that and immediately extrapolate results into national figures.  So the BBC Online report closes by giving the actual figures for our sample size (193 results from 16 congregations) and then giving Tearfund's extrapolated figures for church attendance for 2006.

Ruth Gledhill was more guarded in the Times (page 4 Tuesday 19th Feb) although she provides the source for lots of the other headlines and comments.  Ruth had a copy of the original survey and interviewed my colleague Kate Bruce (referred to, infuriatingly for her, as Katie in a number of reports - good source criticism exercise here) and so her comments are closer to the actual core research than some.  There does seem to be a genuinely positive approach to sermons.  Banksyboy put a comment on Church Mouse's blog which gets close to what people were saying - to our astonishment, really (and others like David Keen).  Sadly some of the bloggers blogged without talking to CODEC - but then why should they.  We need to learn some lessons from this about our own handling of the media, our website and so on.  Sorry for letting people down! 

I was reading through some of the comments on Ruth's online version (linked above) and noted the agreement people were giving to the findings of the micro-survey.  There seems little surprise - even to the ridiculously high 96.6% approval rating.  Actually the figure is not quite accurate (it should be 96.9%) or as good as this suggests because the actual report says that 63.7% 'frequently' look forward to the sermon, with another 33.2% 'sometimes' looking forward to the sermon.  So, if you feel among the 4% (or rather the 3.1%) who don't look forward to your regular sermon slot and that lots of your friends don't either, then it might be that you and your friends identify more with that 33.2% who look forward to the odd highlight or special occasion - 'sometimes' looking forward.  Startingly, the other 3.2% (rounding up issues?) 'seldom' look forward with absolutely no one (0.0%) saying that they never looked forward to the sermon.  These surveys were completed anonymously and without the preacher glaring over people's shoulders! And yes, a number of the sampled churches contained good numbers of teenagers and young people, although the survey sample tended to follow the church's normal elderly bias. 

The point is that this is a small survey - I've been likening it today to investigative surgery which is minimal, non-invasive, temporary but which shows whether much more work is needed in the future.  We think that the survey shows that a much bigger survey is needed but we are going to need to find some funds to enable that survey to happen - to provide a full-time post and to provide some even more rigorous social-scientific analysis at the other end.  But the survey does give us some questions: 

• Why aren't sermons changing people's lives?  
• Why are people happier to reflect internally than to change their behaviour in response to a sermon?
• What's the interplay between contemporary events and issues and the pulpit - and whyever has the church not got this right yet?
• How come so many people seem to like preaching when the anecdotal evidence says that people find preaching boring?
• What of the denominational differences.

There are plenty of other research questions highlighted in the report.

When you look at George Pitcher's comment in his Telegraph blog, another range of issues are raised and these can also be found in some of the comments on Ruth's site and elsewhere.  Preaching may well be receiving a boost in popularity as a counter-cultural response to a sound-bite culture.  In other words, rhetoric and reflection are part and parcel of preaching - perhaps only of preaching (Obama's speeches seem so close to preaching, don't they?).  This dying art seems to be what people look forward to.  Of course, the survey also shows that they want this rhetoric to encourage them, to challenge them, to motivate them and to educate them.  All positive words in a society in which self-improvement and education are so important.  Although, the challenge people want tends to relate to internal changes rather than lifestyle changes.  While admitting that well over half the people surveyed frequently sense the love of God in preaching (in most denominations surveyed!), much fewer had changed their attitude to another person because of a sermon.  Although George Pitcher is right about the popularity of the sermon and its potential power for 'getting the message across', the lack of transformative application into people's lives needs to be explored further.  But, preachers, realise that 96.6% of the people in front of you are willing you to succeed - want you to communicate God's love - are on your side!  As Ruth Perrin said to me when I was preaching at Kings the other day and commented on my nerves - "This isn't a difficult gig, Pete - they're all on your side."

Well, mustn't exhaust my bloggivity in one day...more l8ter as my kids would say...

Pete

p.s. Next Tuesday (26th Jan) from 1300-1400 GMT, we'll be broadcasting our regular CODEC research seminar from Durham on ustream.  Kate and Ben are going to be talking about the report and welcoming questions...either book in if you can get to Durham (for a free lunch!) or log on and send in your comments.  For more notices on this, follow me or CODEC on Twitter (@pmphillips or @codecuk).

 p.p.s. If you want to help CODEC develop even more research - let me know!  We are keen to develop more funding partnerships.

Comments

[Philip Ritchie]

Many thanks for the details about the survey Pete. A significant part of my job is training preachers and there are some very interesting issues and encouraging observations to chew over.

One particular concern I have at the moment is how the sermon can help challenge and encourage the formation of Christian character and I think this ties in with the Why are people happier to reflect internally than to change their behaviour in response to a sermon?

Anyway, I'll order a copy of the report and look forward to hearing more about how the project develops.

Phil

[David Keen]

Likewise, thankyou, this is very helpful and unpacks some of the survey findings. I have a similar question to Phil, which is the efficacy of the sermon as a tool for discipleship. If 'making disciples' is the raison d'etre of the church, then are we actually fulfilling this through the mediums we use?